Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.quux.org!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Every sufficiently competent C programmer knows --- Very Stupid
 Mistake and Liars
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2025 18:46:53 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <1cf1cb0decd938968074e6e82d6f78ca0748c5f5@i2pn2.org>
References: <vqntaq$1jut5$1@dont-email.me> <vqp388$1tvqa$1@dont-email.me>
 <vqpdv9$202b2$2@dont-email.me> <vqperb$20c9k$2@dont-email.me>
 <E6mcnWv3nMa66036nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <vqqnk5$28jtr$1@dont-email.me> <vqqonm$28lh2$1@dont-email.me>
 <vqqq09$28kp8$1@dont-email.me> <vqqq7s$29buv$2@dont-email.me>
 <vqqqu3$28kp8$2@dont-email.me> <vqqrl7$29meg$2@dont-email.me>
 <vqqror$29k3n$1@dont-email.me> <vqqrv9$29meg$4@dont-email.me>
 <vqqs14$29k3n$3@dont-email.me> <vqqs5j$29meg$6@dont-email.me>
 <vqrkav$2h4l2$3@dont-email.me> <vqs9oh$2lqb2$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2025 22:46:54 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="4099233"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
In-Reply-To: <vqs9oh$2lqb2$2@dont-email.me>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 4778
Lines: 96

On 3/12/25 11:37 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 3/12/2025 4:32 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 12.mrt.2025 om 03:39 schreef olcott:
>>> On 3/11/2025 9:37 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>> On 3/11/2025 10:36 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 3/11/2025 9:32 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/11/2025 10:31 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/11/2025 9:18 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 3/11/2025 10:06 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 3/11/2025 9:02 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 3/11/2025 9:41 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/03/2025 01:22, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> DDD correctly simulated by HHH never reaches its
>>>>>>>>>>>> own "return" instruction and terminates normally
>>>>>>>>>>>> in any finite or infinite number of correctly
>>>>>>>>>>>> simulated steps.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If it correctly simulates infinitely many steps, it doesn't 
>>>>>>>>>>> terminate. Look up "infinite".
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But your task is to decide for /any/ program, not just DDD. 
>>>>>>>>>>> That, as you are so fond of saying, is 'stipulated', and you 
>>>>>>>>>>> can't get out of it. The whole point of the 
>>>>>>>>>>> Entscheidungsproblem is its universality. Ignore that, and 
>>>>>>>>>>> you have nothing.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Given that his code has HHH(DD) returning 0, 
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> THESE ARE THE WORDS ANYONE THAT DODGES THESE
>>>>>>>>> WORDS WILL BE TAKEN FOR A LIAR
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> void DDD()
>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>    HHH(DDD);
>>>>>>>>>    return;
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> DDD correctly simulated by HHH never reaches its
>>>>>>>>> own "return" instruction and terminates normally
>>>>>>>>> in any finite or infinite number of correctly
>>>>>>>>> simulated steps.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Changing the input is not allowed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *You are simply lying that any input was ever changed*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You did precisely that when you hypothesize different code for HHH.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Changing the input is not allowed.
>>>>>
>>>>> *THIS IS WHAT MY ORIGINAL WORDS MEANT*
>>>>> HHH is the infinite set of every possible C function
>>>>> that correctly emulates N steps of its input where
>>>>> N any finite positive integer.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In other words, you're changing the input.
>>>>
>>>> Changing the input is not allowed.
>>>
>>> It is an infinite set of HHH/DDD pairs having the
>>> property that DDD[0] ... DDD[N] never halts.
>>>
>> Proving that HHH[0] ... HHH[N} are unable to correctly complete the 
>> simulation. 
> 
> void Infinite_Loop()
> {
>    HERE: goto HERE;
>    return;
> }
> 
> void Infinite_Recursion()
> {
>    Infinite_Recursion();
>    return;
> }
> 
> In the exact same way that HHH cannot complete the
> simulation of the above functions.
> 
> BECAUSE THEY SPECIFY NON-TERMINATING BEHAVIOR.
> 
> 

Right, so we can not use the correct simulation BY HHH as the crireria, 
but it needs to be just the Correct Simulation, which will be the same 
who-ever does it, so HHH doesn't need to actually do it,

Sorry, you are just showing how much your logic is based on FRAUD and LIES.

You don't seem to understand that logic based on incorrect premises 
can't prove anything.